The Colombian media have separated the good from the bad, making it more politically correct. The enemy’s power that the system has to face justifies the results of death, destruction, and poverty, which would not be so great, according to the State itself and its propaganda apparatus, if controlling these enemies were not a priority, a principle that coincides with Guy Debord’s proposal: “This perfect democracy manufactures its inconceivable enemy itself; terrorism. Indeed, it prefers to be judged by its enemies rather than by its results” (1990, p. 36).

Debord (1990) describes the historical journey that converges in the 21st century in a society that uses the spectacle as one of its most significant consumer articles, including politics, which seeks to manipulate citizens using the spectacle as a tool.

“It is not a supplement to the real world; it’s over added decoration. It is the heart of unrealism in real society. In all its guises, information or propaganda, advertising or direct consumption of amusement, the spectacle constitutes the present model of socially dominant life” (Debord, 2008: thesis 6).

In Colombia, the media are part of economic groups. Despite proclaiming their social function, the need to win over audiences is necessary for ensuring a financial profit. On the other hand, the existence of a violent conflict produces raw informative material which can be shown spectacularly, making it a sure formula for generating profits. This, in turn, has created a particular public that consumes its products, as a result of being steered in this direction.

Debord warns how social interaction becomes mediated by the spectacle, and the spectacle becomes the enabler of social links, causing the social space to disappear. Although this notion was previous to the rise in the massification of networks, the principle maintained is that: “the spectacle is not a set of images but a social relationship between people, mediated by images” (Debord, 2008: thesis 4).

In the case of Colombia the boundary between reality and fiction has been erased, making it a useful tool for the spectator to manage to classify a character’s name who has been in the media spotlight in the correct scenario, “the best way to understand the role of the media is to see them as part of a broader confrontation between political antagonists for the control of the public agenda and the public interpretation of specific political realities” (Hangli, 2011: 2).

The disinformation the audience receives is both the result of the flood of information that they are inundated with daily and of a control strategy which has been maintained over time, relying on people’s lack of schooling, who have been trained through the media: “spectacular domination has simply educated a generation subject to its laws” (Debord, 1990:18).

The Colombian drug cartels are Debord’s (1990) starting point for illustrating the functioning of the integrated mafias, as another element that makes up the spectacular society, which, not only appears in the mass media when it commits crimes but also takes advantage of technological advances and social structure. They become entrenched at different levels in society: “the mafia is not alien to the world: it is perfectly integrated into it. In the times of the integrated spectacular, the mafia reigns as the model for all advanced commercial enterprises” (Debord, 1990:85).